An English translation of an article by the French Medias-Catholique website reports upon a letter of Cardinal Muller to Bishop Fellay, in which the Cardinal once again clearly demands capitulation of the SSPX to the false principles and condemned doctrines of Vatican II as the price for canonical recohnition.
Specifically, the SSPX is required to:
- Accept the 1988 “Profession of Faith” which was rejected by Archbishop Lefebvre;
- Explicitly declare their acceptance and adhesion to the teachings of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium;
- Once again acknowledge the “legitimacy” of the new rite of Mass.
What is most concerning, however, is not the plain statement of these unacceptable conditions in and of themselves, but rather, that the Cardinal seems to say that these conditions were/are contained in a new Doctrinal Declaration which Bishop Fellay has been in possession of since the Menzingen/Rome meeting of 6/13/16.
Why is that of particular concern?
Because only 2 months later, Bishop Fellay was explaining to the world (in his August 24, 2016 Australia “Capitulation Conference“) why the offer of the Personal Prelature was not a trap by Rome…even though he was freshly in possession of a new Doctrinal Declaration which demanded the complete capitulation of Tradition as a prerequisite for juridical recognition.
That conference can be viewed here:
Among many other unbelievable statements Bishop Fellay (even while knowing that Rome would only consent to the Prelature on the conditions that he make the 1988 Profession of Faith; that he explicitly declare his acceptance of the errors of Vaitcan II; that he reiterate his belief in the “legitimacy” of the Novus Ordo) nevertheless tells the world:
5:25 – 6:16 – “In itself, you cannot imagine anything better than what is offered there. That such a thing, you cannot think that’s a trap. It’s NOT a trap. That is not what it is. Offering something like that can ONLY produce much good for us….[imperceptible] it will cause Tradition to spread in the Church. It’s impossible to think that such a thing could be meant by the enemy. The enemies have many other ways to crush us down.”
If the complete capitulation of Tradition as a precondition for a juridical recognition is not a trap, then what is?
More to the point, if Catholic charity compels us to consider Bishop Fellay an honest man, then what confidence can we have in a leader who clearly and completely fails to perceive the trap?